The new global tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump following a Supreme Court ruling against existing tariffs have been challenged in court by 24 states. These states filed a lawsuit in the Court of International Trade, asserting that these alternative tariffs are unconstitutional under U.S. law. The lawsuit emphasizes the argument that tariff imposition is not within the presidential authority but falls under Congress's jurisdiction, especially following the Supreme Court's previous ruling against blanket tariff measures.

Leading the lawsuit, New York Attorney General Letitia James criticized the Trump administration's actions, claiming that they disregard both constitutional law and the economic impact on consumers and small businesses. James stated that Trump, having lost authority to impose broad tariffs, is now creating further economic chaos by bypassing the recent Supreme Court decision. This legal challenge highlights an internal struggle over trade policy and the limits of executive power concerning tariff legislation.

The lawsuit specifically cites that the Trade Law's provisions for imposing tariffs are not applicable to the current scenario as there is no meeting of the criteria for a significant trade imbalance or serious international payment issues that warrant such tariffs. Furthermore, the plaintiffs argue that the White House has misrepresented trade deficits to justify the tariffs, which do not reflect the actual economic conditions and violate legislative protocols designed to regulate trade effectively. This ongoing legal battle represents a significant resistance from Democratic states against the Trump administration's trade strategies, potentially leading to a pivotal moment in U.S. trade law interpretation and executive authority.